jadzia92 The reason why I watched Gangland is because of Kathleen Kinmont. I fell in love with her as a result of a certain scene she did with the equally gorgeous Barbara Crampton in Fraternity Vacation. In the post-apocalyptic world presented in Gangland is similar in setting to Cold Harvest featuring Ms Crampton. There were some nice nudity but not from Kathleen. The movie itself is not great as it includes a terrible villain and it was worth watching just for Kathleen alone. What I am seeing from Kathleen is the passion she is portraying with her character and does it very very well. If nothing else Kathleen is the number one reason to watch Gangland as her very presence makes watching it bearable.

k_heil Wow, this was so bad, it was actually kinda funny. Horrible dialog, silly story, bad acting (or directing - I have seen several of the actors in this movie give much better performances), bad fight choreography, bad sound, bad sets & costuming. Plenty of gratuitous nudity, which is probably why the other reviewer liked it so well. So, if you're into that sort of thing, or are just feel like laughing at it, catch this one on cable.

Tom Smith The heroes are good actors (I'm a big Kathleen Kinmont fan) but they're surrounded by bad guys who never went to acting school and a director who couldn't have cared and simply slept through the filming. The movie had potential, the director failed miserably.

bluelaser-1 I don't understand how someone can consciencely recommend this movie. It is one of the worst films that I have seen in years. I go into every movie openminded, but after just 5 minutes I knew was what to come.The storyline of this movie is simple (if not overdone). Nuclear war, chaos, weak falling gov't. Moving gangs go around as a corrupt and makeshift "law" force tries to stop them. While this is going on there is an ebola outbreak ravaging cities and a psychotic leader trying to control the cure.Now from that summary this movie may sound interesting. It goes WAY downhill. My first quirk is with the acting/story. This is low budget movie, ok, but this is disgusting. No one in the movie has heard of the concept of taking cover. That means when your being shot at you move to a position to hide from bullets. You don't stand in the open and fire like Rambo. Trust me, it looks ridiculous and it goes on throughout the whole film. Then there is the fact that the protagonists only fight with pistols and proceed to kickbox. Yes, what a sound technique. 3 strangers team up and randomly mow down people and kick box them. Did I mention that all 3 of them lost a loved one. Well that surely calls for vengeance. The acting is horrible. My god, cover your ears and eyes horrible. I swear to god that half the gangmembers sound like pirates. YARR YARR YARR HAHAH YARR. Then there is their leader who somehow has a bioresearch labratory (in some fictional lair in the US) and he has also bioengineered a super soldier. This is good, he is a deluded king that must think he is royalty. He has a sword and nights people, he wanders about his palace giving orders and not really doing much when they aren't accomplished.I'm going to stop here, because there are so many things to criticize that I can't even organize it all properly. I suggest you steer clear of this movie. I like the genre but this is a stinker if I've ever seen one. I suggest "28 Days Later", "Dawn of the Dead", or anything else if you want a good post-apocalpytic flic. I highly highly recommend 28 days later. The film is excellent and was filmed on a small budget. Makes you think what could have been done with the money wasted on gangland.